@acer 

This is the solution that helped me most, thanks!

thank you very much!

thank you very much!

thanks for the reply.

i tried it, tiny I is still there. except it's smaller now.

thanks for the reply.

i tried it, tiny I is still there. except it's smaller now.

@edgar 

thanks!

@edgar 

thanks!

first of all, rationalize didn't do much, but thanks still.

second of all, this is strange. where is the tiny I from? shouldn't evalf(a) and evalf(b) give exact same result?

test:=x^3+15*x^2-25*x-29;

a:=map(Re+Im*I, simplify(evalc(solve(test)[1])));
evalf(a);

b:=solve(test)[1];
evalf(b);

2.213473994

first of all, rationalize didn't do much, but thanks still.

second of all, this is strange. where is the tiny I from? shouldn't evalf(a) and evalf(b) give exact same result?

test:=x^3+15*x^2-25*x-29;

a:=map(Re+Im*I, simplify(evalc(solve(test)[1])));
evalf(a);

b:=solve(test)[1];
evalf(b);

2.213473994

@ThU

ok i will try that.

but what i meant in the OP was: i basically don't like "I" anywhere because i only want real solutions...

@ThU

ok i will try that.

but what i meant in the OP was: i basically don't like "I" anywhere because i only want real solutions...

@acer 

thanks.

i guess i will have to pick the lesser evil between a,very complicated radical expression or b, a semi-complicated trignometry expression.

well, this is awkward.

@acer 

thanks.

i guess i will have to pick the lesser evil between a,very complicated radical expression or b, a semi-complicated trignometry expression.

well, this is awkward.

anyone else?

i basically need a yes/no answer: is it possible to let maple solve cubics with just radicals? it seems that when i do evalc maple turns the complicated radical solution into a semi-complicated solution in triganomatry form.

anyone else?

i basically need a yes/no answer: is it possible to let maple solve cubics with just radicals? it seems that when i do evalc maple turns the complicated radical solution into a semi-complicated solution in triganomatry form.